Paul Hansmeier, one of a few attorneys closely connected to the embattled copyright-trolling law firm Prenda Law, also has a history of involvement in class action cases (see this report from last week). Representing his father, his law clerk, and others close to him, Hansmeier has made a habit of objecting to class action cases, as well as representing "opt-outs" in those settlements.

We contacted Hansmeier through his organization, the Class Action Justice Initiative, when we covered his class action work last Monday. While he wasn't able to talk with us that day, he was open to arranging an interview later in the week.

At that time, Hansmeier was willing to talk at some length about his involvement in the class action cases, which he called a fight against "perceived injustice" in some class action settlements, especially in the tech sector. But Hansmeier had precisely nothing to say about the issue everyone's watching—his work suing hundreds of "John Does" on behalf of Prenda Law, for allegedly breaking copyright law by downloading porn.

Hansmeier has been ordered to show up to a hearing in Los Angeles federal court tomorrow, April 2. That hearing involves US District Judge Otis Wright, who's shown he is quite upset about some of Prenda's behavior. Wright read Hansmeier's evasive deposition testimony and said during a hearing on March 11 that "someone has an awful lot to hide." (Ars will be reporting from tomorrow's hearing as well.)

The following is a Q&A with Hansmeier from our talk with him late last week. As you can see from the start, the lawyer is not shy about declining a question:

Before we move into discussing your class action work, I was hoping we could start off by discussing some of your work in copyright enforcement.

Copyright enforcement? I thought the purpose of this call was to talk about the class action stuff.

Well, I was hoping we could discuss both. There's been a lot of interest in your copyright work.

I don't want to make any comments about the copyright stuff.

A drive “to fight perceived injustice”

All right, let's talk about the class actions. When did you start getting involved in these cases?

Well, I started looking at them seriously in the first or second quarter of 2012. Some of the cases are objectors to settlements, others are "opt-outs."

What's your motivation in filing these type of cases?

The driving motivation behind filing the objections is to fight perceived injustice in the structure of class action settlements. The basic idea is that you have these settlements where some company has committed some form of wrongdoing or alleged wrongdoing. This is a very dominant trend in the technology area—a lot of class actions are filed against technology companies.

Tell me about the opt-out cases.

One example involves someone who's an opt-out in the class action case against LivingSocial. [LivingSocial was challenged in a case that said its coupons are "gift certificates" that can't expire by law; the company argued that it's in the clear because the original, non-promotional value of the LivingSocial purchase never does expire.] The settlement is a fraction of what they would be entitled to get if they had filed suit themselves. The number of people harmed was in the tens of thousands if not millions. The consideration offered in the settlement was basically nothing. It was pennies on the dollar to the people who settled.

So you have attorneys getting a lot of money and the company avoiding all its wrongdoing. These companies are making more money from the unlawful acts than they are having to pay out the attorneys on the other side. That's what we're trying to address by filing opt-out cases.

What about this case against Hertz? In that case the judge criticized you for basically demanding $30,000 to go away. [The judge wrote that Hansmeier's attempt to "extract $30,000," in a case where his own father was his client, was an example of "bold and improper conduct."]

That's a very classic example of how class attorneys may not represent the interests of the class. I contacted [a class attorney] and said I had some serious concerns with the settlement. He said, "if you have concerns, why don't you send us a demand letter?" This is an attorney who was supposed to be representing my father's interest. He said, "Hey, go ahead and send me this thing." Thinking maybe there's something that you'd be willing to go away for.

When we did that, his response was to use it as a bait and switch, and say "Aha, these guys were here for an improper purpose."

I think conduct like that calls into serious question whether they are indeed acting in the class' best interest.

Well, whether you did it at his behest or not, that is what you were doing, right? You were intervening in the case, preventing a settlement from going through, and then agreed to get out only if you were paid $30,000.

If someone offered you $30,000 to go away from a case, I'm pretty sure you would take that money and go live to fight another day. We are motivated to correct injustices in the case. What we're trying to address is the structure of the settlement. In another case, we did successfully encourage the judge to modify the case, although slightly. If [a settlement] gives money to a charitable organization that has nothing to do with the needs of the class—that's something you can fight.

If you look at the tactics of opposing counsel in a case where someone objects, they always call the other side a serial objector and say "They're just trying to shake us down." Every single case, that's what they say. In the first case I ever objected in, I was called a serial objector!

What about the point raised by the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that so many of your class action clients have close relationships to you? You've represented your law clerk and your father.

Look, I'm not going to walk up to some guy on the street and say, "Do you have some kind of class action objection issue?" You start with people in your inner circle and expand outward. That's how you start any business, including a law practice.

"I thought I made it clear, I'm not going to talk"

We talked about your motivations for getting involved in the class action cases. Without referencing any specific litigation or cases, let's just talk about your motivations for getting involved in the copyright space.

I thought I made it clear, I'm not going to talk about copyright.

There's an April 2 hearing coming up. Are you planning on attending that?

Well, I'm not going to comment on the April 2 hearing.

Can you just say if you're going to go or not?

I'm not going to comment on the April 2 hearing.

Without getting into copyright or particular cases, can you talk about your background with [Prenda lawyer] John Steele, how you came to know him?

I'm not going to comment on John Steele.

Well, going back to class action, like we were discussing before, do you work with John Steele on any of your class action cases?